Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 44 views

    Exceptions To The General Rule of Communication To The Acceptance

    Uploaded by

    dhrubothakur
    There are 3 exceptions to the general rule of communication for acceptance of an offer: 1. Unilateral contracts, where acceptance is implied by conduct such as performance of requested acts rather than communication. 2. The postal rule, where acceptance is effective upon posting rather than receipt if post is a reasonable means of communication. This places more burden on the offeror. 3. Mistakes by the offeror, such as in Entors v Miles where an offeror's mistaken revocation did not prevent acceptance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Exceptions To The General Rule of Communication To The Acceptance

    Uploaded by

    dhrubothakur
    44 views2 pages
    There are 3 exceptions to the general rule of communication for acceptance of an offer: 1. Unilateral contracts, where acceptance is implied by conduct such as performance of requested acts rather than communication. 2. The postal rule, where acceptance is effective upon posting rather than receipt if post is a reasonable means of communication. This places more burden on the offeror. 3. Mistakes by the offeror, such as in Entors v Miles where an offeror's mistaken revocation did not prevent acceptance.

    Original Description:

    nothing

    Original Title

    Exceptions to the general rule of communication to the acceptance

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    There are 3 exceptions to the general rule of communication for acceptance of an offer: 1. Unilateral contracts, where acceptance is implied by conduct such as performance of requested acts rather than communication. 2. The postal rule, where acceptance is effective upon posting rather than receipt if post is a reasonable means of communication. This places more burden on the offeror. 3. Mistakes by the offeror, such as in Entors v Miles where an offeror's mistaken revocation did not prevent acceptance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    44 views2 pages

    Exceptions To The General Rule of Communication To The Acceptance

    Uploaded by

    dhrubothakur
    There are 3 exceptions to the general rule of communication for acceptance of an offer: 1. Unilateral contracts, where acceptance is implied by conduct such as performance of requested acts rather than communication. 2. The postal rule, where acceptance is effective upon posting rather than receipt if post is a reasonable means of communication. This places more burden on the offeror. 3. Mistakes by the offeror, such as in Entors v Miles where an offeror's mistaken revocation did not prevent acceptance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Exceptions to the general rule of communication to the acceptance

    There are 3 exceptions to the general rule;

    1. Unilateral contract [ carlil v carbolic smoke ball company]


    2. Postal rule [ adam’s v linsel]
    3. Offeror’s mistake [ Entors v miles]

    Unilateral contract: the communication of acceptance is waved in a certain number of situations. The
    clearest example of this is in relation to unilateral offers, where the need for communication is waved or
    implied by conduct. The leading authority is Carlil v carbolic smoke ball company. A similar situation
    would apply in reward cases where a reward is offered in return for lost property. All those who
    searched for the item in questioned need not informed the offeror of their intention to accept the offer ;
    the acceptance is complete when the finder returns the item to the offeror [ upon completion of the
    requested act]. It is stated in Dolia V Four mill Bank Nominees that acceptance of unilateral offer
    requires complete performance. Goff LJ held in Dolia that the offeror may revoke at any time up to the
    point that the act has been fully performed,subject to the qualifications that once the performance has
    commenced, the offeror is under an implied obligation not to prevent the performance.

    Postal rule: The postal rule was set down in Adams V lindsell and can be seen as a further exception to
    the rule that acceptance has to be communicated to the offeror. Where post is deemed to be the proper
    means of communication, the acceptance takes effect from the moment the letter of acceptance is
    properly posted. A letter is properly posted when it is put in to an official letter box or in to the hands of
    an employ of the post office who is authorized to receive letters. It isn’t properly posted by putting it in
    to the hands of a postman who is only authorized to deliver letters[RE London and Northern land ex
    parte jones]. However, note that the rule is only applies only to the letters of acceptance, not to letters
    revoking an offer.

    The postal rule places greater burden on the offeror,rather than the offere.

    The postal rule applies even where the acceptance is delayed or lost in the post[ Household fire
    insurance v grant] but it must be reasonable for the offere to use post as a means of communication of
    acceptance [ henthorn v fresor] in Henthorn vs fraser, lord herschell, remarked, “ where the
    circumstances are such that it must have been with in the contemplation of the parties that, according
    to the ordinary uses of mankind the post might be used as a means of communicating the acceptance of
    an offer, the acceptance is complete as soon as it is posted”.

    In Household fire insurance v grant, it was held that a contract was made at the moment the letter of
    allotment[acceptance] was posted. The offeror doesn’t need to know of the letter being posted
    whenever the offere posts the letter of acceptance the acceptance is validly made even if the letter gets
    lost or the offeror doesn’t receive in time or doesn’t receive it at all,the acceptance won’t be
    hampered,this has been furthered developed in Brownlie v four seasons by lord sumption, who clarified
    that in case the letter never arrives; the risk lies with the offeror.
    Postal Acceptance will not be reasonable in the following four circumstances;

    The singaporian case of Chwee Kin Keong V Digi and mall.com Pte Ltd.
    Held that it would be sensible to avoid the postal rule and require a receipt.

    The postal rule applies to non-instantaneous modes of communication and was applied for
    acceptance by telegram and Cowan v o’connor acceptance took place when the telegram was
    posted at the post office.this decision is based on the assumption that sending of the
    assumption that thesending of a teegram is analoguous to the mailing of a letter.

    Offeror’s Fault:

    You might also like